'And' or 'or': General use coordination in ASL
By Kathryn Davidson. 2013
58 citations recorded by the source corpus.
In American Sign Language (ASL), conjunction (‘and’) and disjunction (‘or’) are often conveyed by the same general use coordinator (transcribed as “COORD”). So the sequence of signs MARY WANT TEA COORD COFFEE can be interpreted as ‘Mary wants tea or coffee’ or ‘Mary wants tea and coffee’ depending on contextual, prosodic, or other lexical cues. This paper takes the first steps in describing the syntax and semantics of two general use coordinators in ASL, finding that they have a similar syntactic distribution to English coordinators and and or . Semantically, arguments are made against an ambiguity approach to account for the conjunctive and disjunctive readings; instead, I propose a Hamblin-style alternative semantics where the disjunctive and conjunctive force comes from external quantification over a set of alternatives. The pragmatic consequences of using only a prosodic distinction between disjunction from conjunction is examined via a felicity judgement study of scalar implicatures. Results indicate decreased scalar implicatures when COORD is used as disjunction, supporting the semantic analysis and suggesting that the contrast of lexical items in the scale plays an important role in its pragmatics. Extensions to other languages with potential general use coordination are discussed. http://dx.doi.org/10.3765/sp.6.4 BibTeX info
Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Language and Linguistics
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4065df55bbe67f08760887de6915659447127248
Citations in the corpus
- Children interpret disjunction as conjunction: Consequences for theories of implicature and child development (2016, unknown): “…Sign Language seem to be quite similar in crucial respects: these languages have been characterized as having a single binary connective which denotes inclusive disjunction, but sentences containing this connective allow for a conjunctive interpretation (Bowler 2014, Davidson 2013; see Sect.”